I have a problem in understanding a proof of Goldstine–Weston density theorem. The only thing I don't know in the proof is the part of Helly's theorem to be related. The Goldstine–Weston density theorem is as follows:

Suppose that $X$ is a Banach space and $J_X:X\to X^{\star\star}$ is the canonical embedding. Then $\overline{J_X(X)}^{w^{\star}} = X^{\star\star}$.


We need only to prove $~\overline{J_X(U(X))}^{w^{\star}} = U(X^{\star\star})$, where $U(X)=\{ x\in X : \| x \|\leq 1 \}$, $U(X^{\star\star})=\{ x^{\star\star} \in X^{\star\star}: \| x^{\star\star} \|\leq 1 \}$. Let $\Phi \in U(X^{\star\star})$, for any $w^{\star}$ neighbourhood $V$ of $\Phi$ defined by \begin{equation} V=\{ \Psi \in X^{\star\star}: |\left<x^{\star}_{i}, \Psi - \Phi\right>| < \varepsilon, x^{\star}_{i}\in X^{\star}, i=1, \cdots, n \}, \end{equation} and let $r=\max\{ \| x^{\star}_{i} \|: i=1, \cdots, n \}$. $\color{magenta}{\text{By Helly's theorem,}}$ there exists $x_{\varepsilon} \in X$ such that $\| x_{\varepsilon} \| \leq 1+\frac{\varepsilon}{2r}$, $\left<x_{\varepsilon}, x^{\star}_{i}\right> = \left<x^{\star}_{i}, \Phi \right>, i=1, \cdots, n$. Set $x_{0} = \frac{r}{r + \varepsilon/2}x_{\varepsilon}$, then we have $\| x_0 \|\leq 1$ and \begin{equation} |\left< x^{\star}_i, \widehat{x}_0 - \Phi \right>| = |\left<x_0-x_{\varepsilon}, x^{\star}_{i} \right>| \leq \frac{\varepsilon}{2} \| x_0 \| < \varepsilon, \end{equation} where $\widehat{x}_0 \overset{def}{=} J_X(x_0) \in V$. Thus, $\Phi \in \overline{J_X(U(X))}^{w^{\star}}$. That is, $U(X^{\star\star}) \subseteq \overline{J_X(U(X))}^{w^{\star}}$. The reversed inclusion relation is due to Alaoglu's theorem.

My question:

I don't know what's the Helly's theorem mentioned in the proof and also I can't find this theorem in my book anywhere. Thanks in advance.

Edit $1$:

Tomek Kania has given the Helly's theorem which I want to know at first (I still want to know that from which book or place a proof of it can be found ). I have verified that there exists an element $x_{\varepsilon} \in X$. However, I can't prove the inequality $\| x_{\varepsilon} \| \leq 1+\frac{\varepsilon}{2r}$.


This is what is often called Helly's theorem.

Let $X$ be a Banach space. Let also $f_1, \ldots, f_n\in X^*$ and scalars $\alpha_1, \ldots \alpha_n$ be given. Then the following conditions are equivalent:

  • there exists $x\in X$ such that $\langle x, f_i \rangle = \alpha_i$ ($i\leqslant n$)
  • there exists $\gamma \geqslant 0$ such that for any scalars $\beta_1, \ldots, \beta_n$ we have $$|\sum_{i=1}^n \beta_i \alpha_i| \leqslant \gamma\cdot\|\sum_{i=1}^n \beta_i f_i \|.$$

I think that the fact you need is the following weaker version of the above theorem:

Let $X$ be a Banach space and let $x^{**}\in X^{**}$ be a unit vector. Given a finite set $F\subset X^*$ and $\varepsilon>0$, there exists $x\in X$ such that $\|x\|\leqslant 1+\varepsilon$ and $\langle x,f\rangle = \langle f, x^{**}\rangle$ for all $f\in F$.

Proof. Let $Z = \bigcap_{f\in F}\ker f$. Note that $X/Z$ is finite-dimensional (hence reflexive). Denote by $q\colon X\to X/Z$ the canonical quotient map. Choose now $x\in X$ sitting in $q^{**}(x^{**}) + (X/Z)^{**} = q^{**}(x^{**}) + X/Z$ that has norm not exceeding $1+\varepsilon$. $\square$

Note that the Principle of Local Reflexivity is a powerful extension of this theorem.

  • $\begingroup$ I don't know why $\langle x,f\rangle = \langle f, x^{\star\star}\rangle$ for the $x^{\star\star}$ in it may not just right be the double dual of $x$. In the above comments, I first want to prove that $X/Z$ is finite-dimensional. It needs the property of linearity of $g$ but I can't verify this. By your comment, I have known this inequality $\|x\|\leq 1+\varepsilon$ now. $\endgroup$ – Travis Wang Oct 18 '14 at 13:13
  • $\begingroup$ Kernels of bounded linear functionals have codimension one so the intersection of kernels of $n$ such functionals has codimension at most $n$ (it is equal to $n$ if and only if they are linearly independent). What is a "double of dual of $x$"? $x^{**}$ is just any norm-one element of $X^{**}$. $\endgroup$ – Tomek Kania Oct 18 '14 at 13:25
  • $\begingroup$ I mean $\langle x,f\rangle = f(x)=\langle x^{\star\star}, f \rangle$. But this "$x^{\star\star}$" may not be the $x^{\star\star}$ we first choose in a ball of $X^{\star\star}$. $\endgroup$ – Travis Wang Oct 18 '14 at 13:55
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, I must be missing something. In your notation, consider $x^{**} = \Phi$. $\endgroup$ – Tomek Kania Oct 18 '14 at 14:17
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, I am not that mean. Only $\langle x,f\rangle = \langle f, \Phi\rangle$ is still a question in my mind. Let me say what I have thought: Since $q**(\Phi)$ is an element in $X/Z$, for any $\varepsilon>0$ there exists $x\in X$ such that $\|x\|<\|q**(\Phi)\|+\varepsilon$. Since $\|q**(\Phi)\|\leq \|q\|\leq 1$, we have $\|x\|< 1+\varepsilon$. But I can't see why $\langle x,f\rangle = \langle f, \Phi\rangle$ is valid at the same time because it is not allowed me to use Helly's theorem again. $\endgroup$ – Travis Wang Oct 18 '14 at 15:35

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.